masseffectfandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:Canon
Delete I am trying to figure out the point of this redirect, and I have determined that this is a pointless redirect and needs to go. Lancer1289 20:35, June 6, 2010 (UTC) :It was created as a joke in a discussion a while back. I agree that it's redundant and should be deleted. --silverstrike 20:38, June 6, 2010 (UTC) ::I kind of botched this one. Apparantley you cannot make an external redirect. Several pages lead to 'Canon' and, because I do not have permission to edit some of the places these faulty links are, I was going to attempt to redirect it to the Wikipedia page on Canon. That didn't quite work. --FoxtrotZero 20:39, June 6, 2010 (UTC) If it actually redirected to something on-site, I might be inclined to keep it. But it redirects to another website entirely, and that is one hell of a slippery slope. Let's not head down that path. SpartHawg948 20:40, June 6, 2010 (UTC) *Quick note: Several pages do not lead to canon. There are exactly two instances in which canon is linked. The first is the forum post that it was created as part of (which was a stupid and pointless joke, btw), and the second is a link on a user talk page. SpartHawg948 20:42, June 6, 2010 (UTC) Okay. This is getting very frustrating. Is there any chance I can delete this pointless page and it can just stay deleted??? We have no need of an article from wikipedia about canon. Mass Effect doesn't really have canon, and the only time it comes up is in talk pages and forums. If we ever do need to link it, we can just use links to the wiki article. We don't need to bring the whole damn thing here. SpartHawg948 20:44, June 6, 2010 (UTC) Issue Fixed I put in the desired information from Wikipedia with an acknowledgement that the information was taken thusly. I feel the issue is not only resolved, but we no longer have it showing up as a wanted page, and it can be linked to in future endeavours without fear. I don't feel there is any longer a valid reason to take down this page. --FoxtrotZero 20:44, June 6, 2010 (UTC) :Afterthought. If the page isn't left up, its still marked as wanted, and this is bound to happen again. So if anyone is hellbent on this page not existing, please take the time to fix the links that don't lead anywhere, else leave the matter alone. Thanks. --FoxtrotZero 20:46, June 6, 2010 (UTC) What valid reason is there for its existence? As I point out above, there is exactly 0 requirement for it. The only times it was linked were in a forum post which was the sole reason it was created to begin with, and a user talk page comment. Canon is a topic that very rarely comes up in articles, as most articles are in-universe articles and Mass Effect has very little in the way of canon. We aren't in the habit of importing wikipedia articles (by which I mean this is the first time it's been done), and if we need to, we can just provide an internal link to the wikipedia article itself. There is no need to import the entire article. SpartHawg948 20:48, June 6, 2010 (UTC) :I'm not saying it needs to exist, i'm saying that there was an issue, the issue being broken links and entries on the wanted pages that are in fact NOT wanted. This is all that lies in my power to fix the matter, and if you wish to take it down, please fix the root of the problem and remove the broken links. Then we can say we got somewhere. --FoxtrotZero 20:50, June 6, 2010 (UTC) Redelete This page is completely unnecessary here. This is an encyclopedia of the ME universe and therefore this article is not needed. Clearing the wanted pages cateogry is not enough justification to create an article or a redirect. Lancer1289 20:47, June 6, 2010 (UTC) :If you don't want the page here, please fix the broken links. If you just delete the page again, we've gotten nowhere and the matter is bound to arise again. It would be pointless to go through this and get nowhere. --FoxtrotZero 20:48, June 6, 2010 (UTC) It didn't arise in all the time it was deleted before until you brought it up. If you'd like the redlinks fixed, all you have to do is ask the people who posted them in their comments (as they are all in forum and talk page comments) to fix them. It's not a hard process. SpartHawg948 20:49, June 6, 2010 (UTC) :Also most of those people aren't even around anymore so fixing every broken link would just a useless endevor. This issuse has never come up, so I am puzzled why it is now. Lancer1289 20:51, June 6, 2010 (UTC) ::The issue is here now because it was on the Wanted Pages list. The way i see it, if its there, it is either wanted and should be created, or is not wanted and needs to, though some means, be removed. I am puzzled why you wouldn't want to fix the matter. And to SpartHawg, That honestly didn't occur to me. Hopefully you've just enabled me to sidestep these types of issues in the future. --FoxtrotZero 20:53, June 6, 2010 (UTC) No, as I just explained on your talk page, most of the items in the wanted pages list are unwanted and have already been deleted. I'm sure if you run down the actual links for the items on the wanted pages... er, page, you'll find that the majority of them appear only in either forum posts, or in comments on user pages. This is a sure-fire indicator that the pages are not wanted. I'm fine with seeing them 'fixed', but it needs to be done in a way that is compliant with the rules of the site. SpartHawg948 20:57, June 6, 2010 (UTC) :I actually had the same discussion with Tullis a while back, and after some discussions we unlinked, left a note, and also mentioned it in the edit summary of the talk page. This of course was done only on article talk pages and not on user space or user talk pages. :I understand the issue with altering talk pages that have red links, but we should work on limit those occurrences whenever possible (like the change to the welcome message to not include the link of the first edit the user has made). --silverstrike 21:38, June 6, 2010 (UTC) :So can we get rid of this article as it is just a copy paste from Wikipeida? Lancer1289 20:58, June 6, 2010 (UTC) :Thank you. Lancer1289 20:59, June 6, 2010 (UTC)